[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Consensus Call on RADEXT WG re-charter

To: "'Stefan Winter'" <stefan.winter@restena.lu>
Subject: RE: Consensus Call on RADEXT WG re-charter
From: "Glen Zorn" <glenzorn@comcast.net>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 15:15:06 +0700
Cc: <radiusext@ops.ietf.org>
In-reply-to: <200804150800.53961.stefan.winter@restena.lu>
References: <BLU137-DS3201313A440BD95347E3B93E80@phx.gbl> <01c201c89e64$259ca440$1f0a0a0a@xpsuperdvd2> <001601c89ea3$12f2f7b0$33da787c@arubanetworks.com> <200804150800.53961.stefan.winter@restena.lu>

Stefan Winter <mailto:stefan.winter@restena.lu> scribbled on Tuesday,
April 15, 2008 1:01 PM:

...
> That makes it *different from RADIUS over UDP*, but not
> substantially different from RADIUS *at all*. 

OK, since RFC 2865 only defines RADIUS in terms of UDP, it must not be
the authoritative reference for "RADIUS *at all*".  What is?  I'd like
to read it...

...



--
to unsubscribe send a message to radiusext-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Consensus Call on RADEXT WG re-charter
  - From: Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>
- Re: Consensus Call on RADEXT WG re-charter
  - From: Stefan Winter <stefan.winter@restena.lu>

References:
- Consensus Call on RADEXT WG re-charter
  - From: <Bernard_Aboba@hotmail.com>
- RE: Consensus Call on RADEXT WG re-charter
  - From: "David B. Nelson" <dnelson@elbrysnetworks.com>
- RE: Consensus Call on RADEXT WG re-charter
  - From: "Glen Zorn" <glenzorn@comcast.net>
- Re: Consensus Call on RADEXT WG re-charter
  - From: Stefan Winter <stefan.winter@restena.lu>

Prev by Date: RE: Consensus Call on RADEXT WG re-charter
Next by Date: Re: Consensus Call on RADEXT WG re-charter
Previous by thread: RE: Consensus Call on RADEXT WG re-charter
Next by thread: Re: Consensus Call on RADEXT WG re-charter
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread